Pacific trade deal alarms free Internet activists

Whether a legislative proposal or a trade agreement, Internet rights groups are framing the issues in much the same way: a global threat to free speech and privacy. They’ve cast content providers as repeat players in a battle over the future of intellectual property.

Text Size

The current manifestation is the Trans-Pacific Partnership, negotiations with 11 Pacific Rim nations meant to revolutionize digital trade and set the tone for future agreements.

As the closed-door talks reach a critical stage, activists are resurrecting the past to influence the present.

TPP discussions predate successful efforts to take down anti-piracy legislation known as SOPA or a multinational treaty strengthening IP standards labeled ACTA. The U.S. signed the anticounterfeiting deal but stopped short of ratifying it. And these talks include a wider swath of issues, ranging from textiles to agriculture. But the IP section, a draft of which has been leaked, could present similar challenges as negotiations intensify this year.

“TPP is the new ACTA,” said Maira Sutton, a global policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “It’s very much biased to Hollywood and would ratchet up copyright enforcement at any cost.”

Her group recently sent out a petition letter urging the administration not to “trade away our digital rights.”

The talks have snagged recent attention with Japan’s decision to participate, an impending announcement on a new U.S. trade representative and public cries from Senate Finance Committee leaders to ensure IP protections. The 17th round of talks will take place in Lima, Peru, next month, with a goal to conclude negotiations by the end of the year.

That looks unlikely.

Opponents say the agreement would result in restrictive provisions that force Internet service providers to police the Web, embolden media companies to remove content, hinder innovation and upend laws in other countries. They see the closed-door conversations as a violation of transparency.

“The negotiators from the U.S. will listen, but without transparency being a two-way street, there’s no way to know it we’re having an impact,” said Jodie Griffin, a staff attorney with Public Knowledge, a consumer protection group that advocates for open Internet. “We don’t see a balance based on the text we have access to.”

They’re up against a swath of pharmaceutical industries and business interests that see these talks as critical to opening markets in the world’s fastest-growing region.

“If someone has not made his or her views known, it is not because of lack [of] opportunity,” said Greg Frazier, the Motion Picture Association of America’s executive vice president. He pointed to eight public comment hearings, stakeholder sessions in almost all of the 16 negotiating rounds, and opportunities to seek meetings with the office of the U.S. trade representative.